Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-12-14-Speech-3-021"
| Predicate | Value (sorted: default) |
|---|---|
| rdf:type | |
| dcterms:Date | |
| dcterms:Is Part Of | |
| dcterms:Language | |
| lpv:document identification number |
"en.20051214.6.3-021"2
|
| lpv:hasSubsequent | |
| lpv:speaker | |
| lpv:spoken text |
".
Mr President, two years ago today a letter was written to President Prodi. It bore the signatures of one head of state – President Chirac – and five prime ministers: Balkenende, Blair, Persson, Schröder and Schüssel, four of whom, alas, are still in office today. Signed with poison pens, it is the root of our problems today. That letter called for a limit to EU spending of 1% of gross national income.
Those same heads of state and government simultaneously demanded of the Union policies that they are not prepared to finance. They are Member State leaders who urge on the Union abroad but duck the debate at home; leaders who will the ends, but not the means. Words like ‘unacceptable’ rarely flow from the very moderate lips of the Commission President, who is reportedly one of Mr Blair’s best friends, but the Commission and Parliament must be at one in rejecting a budget that puts the concerns of the accountants above the broader view of the boardroom. I welcome Mr Barroso’s letter to the Presidency-in-Office about this week’s Council.
For Liberals and Democrats in this House, no deal is better than a bad deal. Liberals and Democrats will not compromise Europe’s long-term interests. We will not be implicated in creating a two-tier Europe.
What have the new Member States found in their brave new world? A French President who tells them to shut up, a German Prime Minister who denies them their own tax policies and a British Presidency that moves the goalposts of solidarity. What we expect from the Presidency is a budget that puts long-term strengths and common concerns above individual satisfaction and personal gain. What it seems we will get is a proposal that will paralyse the Union’s priorities and satisfy no one.
President-in-Office, 1.03% of gross national income will not pay for our new policies or for enlargement. This House understood that when we estimated the future financial needs at 1.08% of GNI, and that was a conservative estimate. What about money for challenges, such as security? What about the ambitions of the Lisbon Agenda? Five years ago, we said we would raise research spending to 3% of GDP by 2010. It has slipped down even further: to below 2% last year, compared to 2.5% in the USA and over 3% in Japan.
This is not just a budget for tomorrow. It is a framework that will bind us until 2013. It is a budget that must provide for competitiveness and jobs for our young people. It is a budget that must pay for the social solidarity Europe wants. Parliament should reject any Council agreement that does our Union down.
The Presidency has ambitions for a wider Council agenda. I wish you success. My group hopes that you will review the so-called war on terror. Complicity of EU Member States in warfare using depleted uranium and white phosphorous, detention without trial, torture and turning a blind eye to a clampdown on the freedom of millions in countries with whom we cultivate strategic partnerships debases our Union. Two days ago, the General Affairs Council called for a comprehensive approach to combating terrorism while respecting human rights. Liberals and Democrats want the Council to restate the European Union’s respect for the rule of law and protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and to mean it."@en1
|
| lpv:spokenAs | |
| lpv:unclassifiedMetadata |
Named graphs describing this resource:
The resource appears as object in 2 triples